Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The gate encompasses the front yard. If you think a dog who is protective of his or her yard would only bark at the mailman when the gate was open and would be silent if it was closed you probably aren't too familiar with dog behavior.
The gate does not encompass the front yard. It encompasses the backyard. Is that what you meant?
If you go by Graybill's testimony, he does not say the Peterson dog ever barked at him if she was in the backyard with the gate closed. You are guessing about this dog's behavior. I read it. I don't have to guess. It's there in Graybill's testimony from 13 years ago.
Here Graybill details his common experiences with the Medina dog. Note how he describes this dog as being loud (barking) when behind the gate:
"GRAYBILL: The Medinas had what I call a little yipper, a little black dog that would go behind the gate and would be really loud behind the gate, but when she was outside with me, she would back up and get behind the gate. And I would actually close the gate in order to keep her back there. That's the kind of dog she was."
Here is what he says about the Peterson dog when it was out of the gate. He testifies "there were times," meaning not an everyday, usual occurrence, and "one day," meaning just once according to his recollection. He never mentions the Peterson dog barking from behind the gate, as he made a point about the Medina dog:
"GRAYBILL: I, as I remember it, there were times when the dog was out with her owner and he would take control of the dog and put the dog in the backyard whenever the mailman came by."
"GRAYBILL: Well, like one day there was no one there, okay? The dog was out, all right? And the dog would not let me cross the property. Because you walk, there's no sidewalks. You skirt the grass, on all the houses. So as I would walk up to the house, the dog would be out, and it would be barking at me."
This is his account of 24 December. He does not mention seeing anyone, including the dog, at the Peterson house. He does not mention the gate being open. This was his moment to do so if that's what he saw. He did not, because the gate was not open:
"GRAYBILL: No. I had no problems on December the 24th. It was a normal day."
"GRAYBILL: There was nothing out of the ordinary."
that's a lot of "maybes". Do you realize how rare kidnappings are?? Name one pregnant lady that has been kidnapped in the USA.
Kidnappings are rare. Rare does not mean that they don't happen. Pregnant women have been kidnapped. All you have to do is google it and you'll find instances.
Evelyn Hernandez for example disappeared within 6 months of Laci and her torso sans head, feet and hands washed up in the San Francisco Bay, just like Laci's. She was very pregnant at the time she disappeared.
Being pregnant doesn't make a woman any less of a target of violent crime. The number cause of death for women who are pregnant is homicide. The risk is much lower for non pregnant women in this same age group. No. 1 Cause of Death in Pregnant Women: Murder
If you go by Graybill's testimony, he does not say the Peterson dog ever barked at him if she was in the backyard with the gate closed. You are guessing about this dog's behavior. I read it. I don't have to guess. It's there in Graybill's testimony from 13 years ago.
We know it's not in the testimony but rather in his handwritten notes which should have been disclosed to the jury but were not due to a scanning error.
Quote:
Here Graybill details his common experiences with the Medina dog. Note how he describes this dog as being loud (barking) when behind the gate:
"GRAYBILL: The Medinas had what I call a little yipper, a little black dog that would go behind the gate and would be really loud behind the gate, but when she was outside with me, she would back up and get behind the gate. And I would actually close the gate in order to keep her back there. That's the kind of dog she was."
Here is what he says about the Peterson dog when it was out of the gate. He testifies "there were times," meaning not an everyday, usual occurrence, and "one day," meaning just once according to his recollection. He never mentions the Peterson dog barking from behind the gate, as he made a point about the Medina dog:
"GRAYBILL: I, as I remember it, there were times when the dog was out with her owner and he would take control of the dog and put the dog in the backyard whenever the mailman came by."
"GRAYBILL: Well, like one day there was no one there, okay? The dog was out, all right? And the dog would not let me cross the property. Because you walk, there's no sidewalks. You skirt the grass, on all the houses. So as I would walk up to the house, the dog would be out, and it would be barking at me."
This is his account of 24 December. He does not mention seeing anyone, including the dog, at the Peterson house. He does not mention the gate being open. This was his moment to do so if that's what he saw. He did not, because the gate was not open:
"GRAYBILL: No. I had no problems on December the 24th. It was a normal day."
"GRAYBILL: There was nothing out of the ordinary."
He doesn't say anything about whether the dog barks or does not bark when in the gate in his testimony. He's only talking about it when it was outside of the gate. Your drawing conclusions based on something that just isn't there.
Last edited by MissTerri; 09-20-2017 at 12:37 PM..
On December 27, 2002, Graybill was interviewed Officer M. Callahan and Detective Skultety of the Modesto Police Department. According to Callahan’s handwritten police report, Graybill stated the following in response to the officer’s question “what he remembered from December 24, 2002 when he delivered mail in this area”:
……………“[Graybill] said he entered the area around 1030 to 1045 in the morning. He said he couldn’t remember anything unusual from 516 Covena, but remembered the gate was open at 523 Covena. He said usually the dog barks at him from behind the gate. On 12-24-02 the gate was open and he did not see or hear the dog at 523 Covena.” (See Exh. 3 at HCP-00008.)
More text from the habeas document:
Graybill was the Petersons’ postman, and he delivered mail to the Peterson home between 10:35 and 10:50 a.m. on December 24, 2002. (Exhibit 2 [Declaration of Russell Graybill] at HCP-000005-06; Exhibit 19 [Russell Graybill’s Delivery Record].) Graybill knew the Petersons’ dog, McKenzi, and explained to police (and has recently declared) that McKenzi would bark at him no matter where on the property the dog happened to be. (Exhibit 3 [Statement of Russell Graybill] at HCP-000008.) Whether the dog was in the front or back yards, or even inside the house, McKenzi would bark at Graybill. (Exh. 2 at HCP-000005.)
This was always in evidence, it apparently was stuck together with other pages.
Interesting but the time for these details to come out, if they are factual, was during trial. So the implication now is that Geragos and his team MISSED this evidence, which is why they didn't raise the questions at trial? If so, no one should ever again hire Geragos to defend them.
Still, I find it bewildering Graybill would add such detail about the Medina dog, and leave out such detail about the Peterson dog. It just doesn't make sense.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 12 days ago)
35,640 posts, read 17,994,810 times
Reputation: 50680
So. A lot of times, a crime investigation hangs on something that seems reasonable, and so people's opinions are thrown way off track. It seems reasonable that if McKenzie were in the back yard, he would have barked at the mailman.
Remember little Jessica Lunsford? At the age of 9, kidnapped out of her bed in her grandparent's trailer at 3 a.m., made to walk to John Couey's trailer a short distance away where she was kept for days and raped until she was killed.
Jessica had a little snappy barky dachshund that slept on her bed. He was protective of her, and also very barky. The thought was well, the dachshund didn't bark and so therefore it was her grandpa or father who took her. Nope. It was this meth head who broke into the trailer.
Then, the search dogs didn't locate her trail, leading from her trailer to Couey's although she walked there.
Sometimes, you can get hung up on something that you believe must be true - McKenzie would have barked. Jessica's dog would have barked. And they're not true at all.
"[Graybill] said he entered the area around 1030 to 1045 in the morning. He said he couldn’t remember anything unusual from 516 Covena, but remembered the gate was open at 523 Covena. He said usually the dog barks at him from behind the gate.
This was always in evidence, it apparently was stuck together with other pages.
So the implication is that Geragos and his team failed to uncover this evidence. If so, no one should ever again consider hiring Geragos.
There is a contradiction to be noted from above: If Graybill claims the Peterson dog USUALLY barks at him from behind the gate, then wouldn't it be UNUSUAL if she didn't bark that day?
Officer Callahan's handwritten notes do not correspond with Graybill's testimony. Officer Callahan likely had mistaken Graybill mentioning other occasions when the gate was open.
Graybill did not testify either the gate was open or that the Peterson dog barked. Graybill offered plenty of candid detail in his testimony that it's illogical to think he was waiting for those specific questions. Further, was subjected to multiple examinations: 1. Direct by Harris, 2. Cross by Geragos, 3. Re-direct by Harris, and 4. Re-cross by Geragos, and he couldn't get in the detail about the gate?
I've seen this image before. Karen Servas refers to the gate on the left as a "side gate" and the gate by the driveway as the main gate that the Petersons used.
Despite the entry point being inside the gate, I would still reference anything inside the gate as the backyard, and anything outside the gate as the front yard. But, I understand why you refer to it differently.
The only part that really matters is that the mailman's notation that the gate was open and the dog did not bark...
If Karen Servas returned the dog to the yard at 10:18, closed the gate and left and the mailman shows up 20 minutes or so later and the gate is open and there is no dog in the yard then what could that mean?
Then you have to reconcile Amie Krigbaum who insists she knows all the distinctive barks of the neighbors' dogs, including McKenzie. She claims to have heard McKenzie as early as 10:30. I have doubted this but am now reconsidering.
If Graybill did not see an open gate at the Peterson house, as per the absence of this fact in his testimony, and he arrives, McKenzie barks which is what Amie Krigbaum hears, then Karen Servas' time still applies, but McKenzie IS there and Laci is not.
What is the Defense theory on how the leash got on McKenzie and the gate was opened before 10:18? Would Laci leave the gate open with McKenzie free to roam while she ran inside to powder her nose? That would be a real stretch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
